Can anyone explain if having a 360-degree rotordome coverage is actually beneficial given the type of terrain we have? Some argue that it lacks front and back detection, but why would it need radar in those directions if it typically won't be flying straight into enemy territory, but rather along the border, at a distance from it? In our terrain, whether it's along the border with Pakistan or China, our movements tend to follow the shape of our borders, sort of like a back-and-forth motion, providing us with a clear picture. Even if we have a 360-degree radome, it seems unlikely that the front and back radars would be of much use. Considering the challenges Embraers face in the Himalayas, why not opt for Bombardier planes with their impressive 12-hour endurance? I believe the endurance of A320/A321-based aircraft is around 6 hours, but correct me if I'm mistaken. To keep them airborne for longer durations, we'd need to deploy tankers, which adds to the logistical burden. So, what's the rationale behind the Indian Air Force or the Center for Airborne Systems (CABS) opting for a never-before-seen A321-based platform? Also can this A320 based platform reach endurance of 10 hours like E-7 Wedgetail?. Correct if iam wrong in any opinion.
View attachment 239800
